“Clubhouse Chemistry”
We hear this phrase a lot. With approval from sportswriters and sportscasters. With contempt from “stat geeks.” What does the phrase actually mean? Does it mean that the players are buddies? Does it mean that they don’t try to undermine each other? Does it mean that the “frat” mentality takes over and guys with less experience (rookies) are kept in their place and made to like it? Does it mean that guys believe they are on a winning or losing clubhouse and attitudes are catching? Does it mean that somehow that the guys rely on each other and do better because they have confidence in their fellow players’ abilities? All of the above? None of the above?
Or is their play independent of any external factors such as confidence or emotions? Are men simply stratomatic cards out there on the field (except for Jose Lima and Carlos Zambrano?) Do males believe that you should show no emotion on the field because doing so makes you, what? Less good? Mo better? Does lookin like they just don’t care make them play better? Worse? No effect?
Well, I do know that every ex-player I have ever heard talks about how the way that things are in the clubhouse affects how things are on the field. Haven’t we heard from players who go to the Yankees or Braves who say that when they get there the atmosphere is different, that the guys “expect to win?” I do know that some groups of people work better together and do better work than other groups of people. I know that my husband quit his job 2 years ago for one that takes him longer to drive to (and that is VERY important in a city that is 60 miles across) because he didn’t like the new manager who got rid of 2 nice guys and replaced them with 2 guys who were pigs. He said he didn’t like the environment and he didn’t want to work where he was unhappy. Isn’t that “clubhouse chemistry?”
I know my Aunt Mary, who is a nurse, quit her job of 22 years and moved to a different CITY to take a new job because she didn’t like the new administration’s preference for harrassing older, better trained, higher paid nurses in order to replace them with young, underqualified, cheaper nurses or travelers so it would look better on the budget? Isn’t that “clubhouse chemistry?”
Why wouldn’t men perform much better when they work with people they like and trust, both personally and professionally? Baseball players themselves CONSTANTLY talk about confidence. I can’t believe that any man wouldn’t care if his teammates have his back or not. Because if you can’t depend on the men you work with, how can you work your best?
I guess this gets back to my thoughts about Roy-O and losing. If the other guys don’t seem to care if they win or lose, why wouldn’t it be harder for to you to care? If you can’t be sure of your fielders catching balls, why WOULDN”T that affect your pitching? If you think you NEED to have a strikeout every time, why WOULDN’T that affect the way you throw? And your concentration? And your attitude toward the lead gloves who let you down? You just can’t assume that men can perform a certain way independent of their circumstances. Because they’re not robots. Or strat cards
Tags: Houston Astros, MLB
OTOH, maybe there are some pitchers who are more interested in pitching a complete game shutout than in standing up for their teammates who’ve been hit by pitches. I’m sure that it’s not a whole lot of fun to play behind these kind of guys. It’s like coming up to bat with a neon “Hit Me!” sign on your jersey.
There’s two sides to this chemestry thing. Like most things in life, no one is completely right and no one is completely wrong. Everyone needs to do a little inventory and set about taking care of business and get it straightened out.
Lisa,
Great piece. Still smarting from my Expos losing to the 1979 Pirate happy-familee and them stars that Willie Stargell handed out, I always thought that clubhouse chemistry was all about illegal stuff…. Now, how do you know about strat-cards. Isn’t that the old 1950s Stratomatic game?
Well, Strat-O-Matic is still around.
I played it in the 70′s & 80′s, and there is a computer version available (unfortunately not for Macintosh). Back to subject, yes, workplace environment is the same as “clubhouse chemistry”. If you like and respect the people around you, you perform better yourself, particularly in a competitive environment like a sports team. You work harder so as not to let the others down. It isn’t about emotion per se, men frequently internalize their emotions, although there are those of us who don’t. 
Still, body language comes into that. Also, I think communication is important – the Astros bullpen really needed Roy O to pitch that complete game shutout, so he needed to stay in there and not get ejected for something juvenile. The pitchers need to tell the hitters, hey, we’ll get your back next time. On the other hand, there’s nothing wrong with buzzing someone high and tight to get your message across, you don’t have to drill ‘em, just dust them (I read that Bob Gibson enjoyed doing just that). Same thing with how pitchers get down after an error – you have to respect your teammate, know that he was trying his best (although Kent probably isn’t), and pick them up with your own play. You can’t let their mistake lead you into one yourself. I’ve been guilty of that on the softball field as a pitcher, and back in high school baseball as an infielder, I was on the other side of that. The important thing was that I learned how much of a mistake it was, and perhaps more of the Astros need to learn that lesson.
I like Dierk’s take on dealing with errors. Joe Morgan boots the ball on two consecutive plays and he goes and hands the ball back to Dierk and he says to him, “I’m glad you’re pitching because you can get us out of this.” I think if someone had said something like this to Roy things might’ve gone down a bit differently.
Oh yeah, and ditto on Bob Gibson–I’m reading his book right now. You don’t have to hit a guy to send him a message.
john & jean-pierre,, i’ve never actually played strat, just heard about it…
annie, your comment in #4 was dead on. although joe morgan had a MUCH better glove than kent/biggio/lamb!!!!! here, the pitchers KNOW that they can’t really depend on most of their fielders. and i saw a replay of the first homer Kent hit on Wed – he didn’t even stop to slap the outstretched hand of the batter at the plate.